1. The unsuccessful appellant/plaintiff filed the second appeal, who lost the case before the courts below.

2. The averments contained in the plaint, in brief, are as follows:

(a) The appellant/plaintiff Devasthanam owns and is entitled to the suit property among other house sites, nanja and punja lands. The suit property was a minor inam, now converted into Ryotwari and for which after dispute plaintiff Devasthanam is granted patta.

(b)The defendant's predecessors-in-interest belonging to Isaivellalar community were rendering service to the temple both as Devasasi and as skilled musician playing on musical instruments like Mridangam, Thaval and were skilled papers and they were tenants of the said Devasthanam as they were tenant rendering service either as Devadasi or as skilled musician.

(c)The defendant and his predecessors-in-title never refused to render service to the plaintiff Devasthanam and when they originally occupied the suit site as tenant recognising the title of the plaintiff Devasthanam continue to occupy it as tenant and they are either rendering service or they make small payment towards rent and otherwise they continue to recognise the title of the plaintif